Re: Python 3.9 for bullseye

2020-11-13 Thread Matthias Klose
On 11/11/20 3:27 AM, Michael Hudson-Doyle wrote: > On Mon, 9 Nov 2020 at 22:20, Matthias Klose wrote: > >> On 10/23/20 1:07 PM, Matthias Klose wrote: >>> On 10/18/20 12:13 PM, Matthias Klose wrote: >>>> Python 3.9 as a supported Python3 version is no

Re: Python 3.9 for bullseye

2020-11-09 Thread Matthias Klose
On 10/23/20 1:07 PM, Matthias Klose wrote: > On 10/18/20 12:13 PM, Matthias Klose wrote: >> Python 3.9 as a supported Python3 version is now in unstable, and all binNMUs >> are done (thanks to Graham for the work). Bug reports should be all filed >> for >

Re: "pytest" command is missing

2020-11-05 Thread Matthias Klose
On 11/5/20 1:03 PM, terce...@debian.org wrote: > On Thu, Nov 05, 2020 at 09:28:56AM +0100, Thomas Goirand wrote: >> On 11/4/20 9:27 PM, Novy, Ondrej wrote: >>> Hi, >>> >>> Antonio Terceiro píše v St 04. 11. 2020 v 14:01 -0300: Could you ellaborate? Maybe we should have a discussion in the

Re: Python 3.9 for bullseye

2020-10-28 Thread Matthias Klose
On 10/23/20 1:07 PM, Matthias Klose wrote: > On 10/18/20 12:13 PM, Matthias Klose wrote: >> Python 3.9 as a supported Python3 version is now in unstable, and all binNMUs >> are done (thanks to Graham for the work). Bug reports should be all filed >> for >

Re: Python 3.9 for bullseye

2020-10-23 Thread Matthias Klose
On 10/18/20 12:13 PM, Matthias Klose wrote: > Python 3.9 as a supported Python3 version is now in unstable, and all binNMUs > are done (thanks to Graham for the work). Bug reports should be all filed > for > all known problems [1], and the current state of the 3.9 addition

Python 3.9 for bullseye

2020-10-18 Thread Matthias Klose
Python 3.9 as a supported Python3 version is now in unstable, and all binNMUs are done (thanks to Graham for the work). Bug reports should be all filed for all known problems [1], and the current state of the 3.9 addition can be seen at [2] (a few of the "bad" are false packages with b-d n

Re: Python 2 support for Bullseye

2020-10-16 Thread Matthias Klose
On 10/16/20 8:04 PM, Moritz Mühlenhoff wrote: > There will be few core packages build-depending on Python 2 (for tests > or building) which won't be ready for Python 3 for Bullseye (Chromium, > qtwebkit and IIRC also Pypy), but those only need Python 2 (and a very > small set of support packages

Re: Bug#972213: boost1.71: Please indicate some way which python versions you support

2020-10-16 Thread Matthias Klose
On 10/15/20 10:03 PM, Alastair McKinstry wrote: > On 15/10/2020 08:13, Giovanni Mascellani wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> Il 14/10/20 15:52, Alastair McKinstry ha scritto: >>> I maintain the package "ecflow" which uses libboost-python-dev. Now >>> with the transition to python3.9, ecflow will support

Re: Timing of Python (3.9) upstream and Debian releases

2020-10-12 Thread Matthias Klose
On 7/6/20 9:04 PM, Matthias Klose wrote: > Starting with Python 3.8, Python upstream changed to a time based yearly > release > schedule, targeting the first release of a major Python version (3.x) for > October of each year. For the transition to 3.8: > > - we add 3.8 as sup

Re: The python command in Debian

2020-09-17 Thread Matthias Klose
On 9/17/20 3:04 PM, Nicolas Dandrimont wrote: > Hi Matthias, others, > > On Thu, Jul 9, 2020, at 15:26, Matthias Klose wrote: >> As written in [1], bullseye will not see unversioned python packages and the >> unversioned python command being built from the python-defaults pa

Re: Bug#967209: rgtk2: Unversioned Python removal in sid/bullseye

2020-08-04 Thread Matthias Klose
block 967209 by 967157 thanks sorry, that's due to uninstallability of libglade2-dev. On 8/4/20 2:49 PM, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote: > > Hi doko and Python folks, > > On 4 August 2020 at 09:29, Matthias Klose wrote: > | Package: src:rgtk2 > | Version: 2.20.36-2 > | Severity:

Re: The python command in Debian

2020-07-13 Thread Matthias Klose
On 7/13/20 6:23 PM, Fabrice BAUZAC-STEHLY wrote: > Hi, > > Another solution would be to simply use the update-alternatives system > to manage /usr/bin/python. python3 would have a higher priority than > python2. Users would still have the possibility to switch > /usr/bin/python to python2

The python command in Debian

2020-07-09 Thread Matthias Klose
As written in [1], bullseye will not see unversioned python packages and the unversioned python command being built from the python-defaults package. It seems to be a little bit more controversial what should happen to the python command in the long term. Some people argue that python should

Re: Python2 packages for bullseye

2020-07-09 Thread Matthias Klose
On 7/9/20 1:45 PM, Scott Kitterman wrote: > On Thursday, July 9, 2020 7:21:45 AM EDT Matthias Klose wrote: >> The removal of packages still depending on Python2 looks good [1], however >> we have a bunch of packages that still require Python2, and where >> maintainers exp

Python2 packages for bullseye

2020-07-09 Thread Matthias Klose
The removal of packages still depending on Python2 looks good [1], however we have a bunch of packages that still require Python2, and where maintainers explicitly asked to keep those in the distro [2]. Among those are pypy and pypy3 which need Python2 for bootstrapping. I'm going to keep the

Timing of Python upstream and Debian releases

2020-07-06 Thread Matthias Klose
Starting with Python 3.8, Python upstream changed to a time based yearly release schedule, targeting the first release of a major Python version (3.x) for October of each year. For the transition to 3.8: - we add 3.8 as supported in November - made 3.8 the default in March - dropped 3.7 in

Python3 -dbg packages

2020-07-06 Thread Matthias Klose
Python 3.8 upstream now has a common ABI for normal and debug extension builds, so it is technically possible to load a debug extension in the normal interpreter, or to load a normal extension in the debug interpreter. In Debian, debug extensions are shipped with a different name, and only loaded

Re: Python Wheel Related Policy Change

2020-04-30 Thread Matthias Klose
On 4/30/20 5:28 AM, Scott Kitterman wrote: > I think Python policy changes should be discussed. I accidentally committed > a > change to git [1] (I didn't realize I still had access, I thought it would be > a merge request) to allow Python 3 only wheels for packages that require > wheels, but

Re: Python3 modules not built for all supported Python versions

2020-03-30 Thread Matthias Klose
On 3/30/20 1:24 PM, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote: > Hi, > > We've just finished the transition to python3.8 as the default python3 > interpreter, which was a bit difficult due to some autopkgtest regressions in > a > few rdeps, and to the fact that many modules only build their extensions for >

Re: Bug#949187: transition: python3.8

2020-02-03 Thread Matthias Klose
On 2/3/20 8:22 PM, Simon McVittie wrote: > On Sun, 02 Feb 2020 at 09:35:04 +0100, Matthias Klose wrote: >> I think this is now in shape to be started. > > Please can this wait until the remaining bits of the libffi7 transition > and the restructuring of the libgcc_s packaging

Re: Bug#949187: transition: python3.8

2020-02-02 Thread Matthias Klose
On 2/2/20 5:53 PM, Rene Engelhard wrote: > On Sun, Feb 02, 2020 at 09:35:04AM +0100, Matthias Klose wrote: >>> On 17-01-2020 23:28, Matthias Klose wrote: >>>> Please add a transition tracker to switch the python3 default to 3.8. >>>> It's not >>>

Re: Bug#949187: transition: python3.8

2020-02-02 Thread Matthias Klose
Control: tags -1 - moreinfo On 1/18/20 9:30 PM, Paul Gevers wrote: > Control: tags -1 moreinfo > > Hi Matthias, > > On 17-01-2020 23:28, Matthias Klose wrote: >> Please add a transition tracker to switch the python3 default to 3.8. It's >> not >> yet ready

Re: Updating pip

2020-01-24 Thread Matthias Klose
On 24.01.20 20:00, Scott Kitterman wrote: > I started looking into updating pip to the current release thanks for doing that. > packaging the recent version is in the archive but ftbfs. it's a dh-python issue. Matthias

Re: dh_python3 sets shebang to Python 2 -- is this a bug?

2020-01-23 Thread Matthias Klose
On 22.01.20 02:18, Nicholas D Steeves wrote: > I don't think this is an assumption. Debian adheres to PEP 394, which > until recently said that /usr/bin/python is supposed to be Python 2, for > backwards compatibility. When I discovered this I felt increased trust > in Debian and its developers

Re: python-datrie: FTBFS with recent hypothesis version

2019-12-09 Thread Matthias Klose
On 09.12.19 11:46, Andreas Tille wrote: > Hi, > > I have upgraded python-datrie in Git[1] to latest upstream version > (0.8). It shows the same issue - so I admit I have no better clue than > reporting the issue upstream which I'd rather leave to the official > Uploader of the package. > > BTW,

Re: Severity bump script

2019-12-03 Thread Matthias Klose
On 02.12.19 20:28, Paul Gevers wrote: > Hi all, > > On 01-12-2019 22:45, Sandro Tosi wrote: >> Paul, this is the thread i was talking about. >> >> you were copied in the original email: >> https://lists.debian.org/debian-python/2019/10/msg00098.html >> >> if there is something the RT wants to

Re: Python 3.8 transition: CMake problems

2019-11-26 Thread Matthias Klose
On 26.11.19 11:02, Ole Streicher wrote: > Hi, > > I am currently updating the "casacore" package to the latest upstream > version. Doing this, I discovered that it is not marked as part of the > Python 3.8 transition, and was also not binNMUed for this, although it > has the package

Re: Bug#942106: Adding Python 3.8 as a supported Python3 version

2019-11-14 Thread Matthias Klose
On 12.11.19 23:39, Matthias Klose wrote: > On 07.11.19 15:08, Matthias Klose wrote: >> This weekend, I am planning to upload python3-defaults, adding python3.8 as a >> supported Python3 version.  This may introduce some churn in unstable until >> the >> basic bi

Re: Adding Python 3.8 as a supported Python3 version

2019-11-12 Thread Matthias Klose
On 07.11.19 15:08, Matthias Klose wrote: > This weekend, I am planning to upload python3-defaults, adding python3.8 as a > supported Python3 version.  This may introduce some churn in unstable until > the > basic binNMUs are available as well. > > Details for the addition

Re: Python 2 removal in sid/bullseye: Progress and next steps

2019-11-11 Thread Matthias Klose
On 11.11.19 11:43, Yves-Alexis Perez wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 On Mon, 2019-11-11 at 10:33 +0100, Ondřej Nový wrote: We are going to raise the severity of the py2removal bugs to "serious" in several steps. In the first phase we are going to raise severity of the

Adding Python 3.8 as a supported Python3 version

2019-11-07 Thread Matthias Klose
This weekend, I am planning to upload python3-defaults, adding python3.8 as a supported Python3 version. This may introduce some churn in unstable until the basic binNMUs are available as well. Details for the addition can be found at [1], known issues and patches are filed [2]. There was

Re: Bug#943666: python3: Update Python Policy for removal of the Python 2 stack

2019-11-06 Thread Matthias Klose
On 06.11.19 22:04, Nicholas D Steeves wrote: Brian May writes: Stéphane Blondon writes: Perhaps there is a doubt how to read it? - do not (remove python-foo-doc or rename it to python3-foo-doc) - (do not remove python-foo-doc) or (rename it to python3-foo-doc) Would it be better if we

Re: Bug#943666: python3: Update Python Policy for removal of the Python 2 stack

2019-11-03 Thread Matthias Klose
On 03.11.19 15:09, Neil Williams wrote: On Sun, 3 Nov 2019 15:00:17 +0100 Matthias Klose wrote: [discussing this outside the bug report on the ML] On 03.11.19 14:39, Neil Williams wrote: Actually, that's a good catch. I was mixing up the defaults package with the general advice on python3

Re: Bug#943666: python3: Update Python Policy for removal of the Python 2 stack

2019-11-03 Thread Matthias Klose
[discussing this outside the bug report on the ML] On 03.11.19 14:39, Neil Williams wrote: Actually, that's a good catch. I was mixing up the defaults package with the general advice on python3 migration to not remove python-foo-doc just to rename it to python3-foo-doc. where did you read

Re: Python module packages that don't bytecompile on installation?

2019-11-03 Thread Matthias Klose
On 03.11.19 02:20, Paul Wise wrote: On Sat, Nov 2, 2019 at 6:04 PM Matthias Klose wrote: At this point I'd ignore any Python2 related package, and concentrate on Python3 stuff only. Yes, I was referring only to python3-* module packages. Byte compilation is an optimization, speeding up

Re: Python module packages that don't bytecompile on installation?

2019-11-02 Thread Matthias Klose
On 02.11.19 04:22, Paul Wise wrote: Hi all, I run adequate on my system, which means I notice when Python module packages don't bytecompile when they are installed. So far I've just been ignoring the warnings that adequate prints. https://salsa.debian.org/debian/adequate In addition I

Re: Bug#936214: bleachbit: Python2 removal in sid/bullseye

2019-11-02 Thread Matthias Klose
On 02.11.19 09:05, Hugo Lefeuvre wrote: Hi Matthias, I see that you just raised the severity of this bug to serious, and Bleachbit is now to be removed on 16.11. I don't think this is the way to go. Upstream is actively working on this. We have recently managed the GTK3 migration, meaning that

packages with the py2keep tag

2019-11-01 Thread Matthias Klose
https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/pkgreport.cgi?tag=py2keep;users=debian-python@lists.debian.org doesn't show show too many packages yet, which is good. Not sure if we should tag the dependencies of these packages with a different tag, e.g. py2keep-dep for python-setuptools. Im unsure if I

Re: Bug#942106: (some kind of) transition: add python3.8 as a supported python3 version

2019-10-26 Thread Matthias Klose
On 26.10.19 22:09, Rebecca N. Palmer wrote: What should be done with modules where Python 3.8 compatibility requires moving to a new upstream release that doesn't support Python 2, but the Python 2 package still has dependencies (so can't be removed yet under existing rules)? - Split them

dh-python now generates dependencies on python2 instead of python

2019-10-22 Thread Matthias Klose
For Python2 packages, dh-python 4.20191017 now rewrites any python shebang to /usr/bin/python2 and generates dependencies on python2 instead of python. The py2removal bugs have a section """ - If the package has still many users (popcon >= 300), or is needed to build another package which

Discussing next steps for the Python2 removal

2019-10-22 Thread Matthias Klose
Paul Gevers from the release team pointed out that the Python2 removal is causing some uninstall-ability issues in testing because some packages apparently are removed too early, but never the less are migrating to testing. He suggested to make the removal plan more concrete and having a

Re: Python2 removal: package with low-popcon reverse dependencies

2019-10-11 Thread Matthias Klose
On 11.10.19 18:27, Christian Kastner wrote: Hi, python-cachetools provides modules for Python2 and Python3. The Python2 module as two reverse dependencies, both with low installed popcon: python-cachetools: 302 mopidy-podcast: 109 mopidy-internetarchive: 95 This

Re: should Debian add itself to https://python3statement.org ?

2019-09-12 Thread Matthias Klose
On 12.09.19 17:01, Ian Jackson wrote: Drew Parsons writes ("should Debian add itself to https://python3statement.org ?"): https://python3statement.org/ is a site documenting the projects which are supporting the policy of dropping Python2 to keep Python3 only. That statement is a *pledge*

Re: Bug#936613: ginac: Python2 removal in sid/bullseye

2019-09-10 Thread Matthias Klose
On 10.09.19 20:31, Richard B. Kreckel wrote: On 10.09.19 11:29, Matthias Klose wrote: Please read the instructions, they mention to check dependencies, build dependencies, and test dependencies ... I have read https://wiki.debian.org/Python/2Removal and the linked pages. Are there any other

Re: Should python-cloudpickle get a py2keep tag?

2019-09-05 Thread Matthias Klose
On 05.09.19 19:50, Diane Trout wrote: Hi, The py2removal bug says to discuss the py2keep tag first. src:cloudpickle is a dependency of src:spyder and src:skimage. python-skimage has a popcon inst score of 469 spyder has a popcon inst score of 1385 spyder3 has a popcon inst score of 1069 The

Re: Python 3 transition question

2019-09-01 Thread Matthias Klose
On 01.09.19 21:48, Martin Kelly wrote: Hi, I maintain python-gmpy and python-gmpy2, which need to transition to Python 3. However, they have several packages that have Suggests or Recommends (not a hard dependency) pointing to python-gmpy/python-gmpy2. These other packages appear to be

Re: updating mechanize - help concerning tests with pybuild

2019-08-31 Thread Matthias Klose
confident simply uploading someone's else package. Best would probably be if Matthias Klose, one of the current Uploaders, agrees to that and uploads the current package thus passing over maintainership. Matthias? did you see my comment in #936270?

Filing py2removal bugs with correct attributes

2019-08-28 Thread Matthias Klose
Please file Python2 removal bugs with the appropriate attributes. It's Package: ftp.debian.org Severity: normal User: debian-python@lists.debian.org Usertags: py2removal - It's NOT "Usertag". Usertag is only recognized by the bug server. - It's NOT "py2-removal". It's "py2removal". See

Re: py2-rm: a few leaf packages to work on

2019-08-25 Thread Matthias Klose
On 24.08.19 07:03, Scott Kitterman wrote: > On Thursday, August 15, 2019 8:08:41 AM EDT Thomas Goirand wrote: >> Hi there! >> >> According to the daily graph I built here: >> http://py2graph.infomaniak.ch/py2.7.deps.svg >> >> we can work on Python 2 removal for the below packages. Note that I have

Re: py2-rm: a few leaf packages to work on

2019-08-25 Thread Matthias Klose
On 25.08.19 00:08, Thomas Goirand wrote: > On 8/24/19 10:38 AM, Neil Williams wrote: >> How is that graph turned into a list of packages? It's too large to >> scan manually. > > Well, I did it manually... and this is only a short list, as a > suggestion for a todo list, so nothing exhaustive... I

Re: Investigating the reverse dependencies of python-monotonic.

2019-08-13 Thread Matthias Klose
On 13.08.19 15:30, peter green wrote: > IMO python-monotonic should be reinstated until it's reverse dependencies are > sorted out. I agree with that.

Re: Re: dropping python2 [was Re: scientific python stack transitions]

2019-07-16 Thread Matthias Klose
On 16.07.19 17:31, Julien Puydt wrote: > Le 16/07/2019 à 17:21, Andrey Rahmatullin a écrit : >> Python 2 is included in buster and so will be supported for several >> years. >> > > The starting point of the thread was : > 1. Ok, buster has Python 2 so even if upstream drops it, we will still >

Re: Plan for DebCamp

2019-07-16 Thread Matthias Klose
On 13.07.19 23:18, Emmanuel Arias wrote: > Hello everybody, > > Next week will start the DebCamp and then DebConf. I would like to know > to any debian python team member :-) > > Exist any plan for debian packaging during the DebCamp/DebConf? > > Unfortunately, I will arrive to Curitiba on 18th

Re: dropping python2 [was Re: scientific python stack transitions]

2019-07-07 Thread Matthias Klose
On 07.07.19 16:55, Drew Parsons wrote: > On 2019-07-07 22:46, Mo Zhou wrote: >> Hi science team, >> >> By the way, when do we start dropping python2 support? >> The upstreams of the whole python scientific computing >> stack had already started dropping it. > > Good question.  I think it is on

Re: Command to query “Python versions that are installed *with* standard library”

2019-01-24 Thread Matthias Klose
On 24.01.19 00:16, Ben Finney wrote: > Howdy all, > > What is a ‘py3versions’ (or alternative) command that can be run in > AutoPkgTest, to query the Python versions that are installed on this > machine *with* their standard library? > > The ‘pythonX.Y-minimal’ packages can be installed

Re: Bug#916428: autopkgtest-virt-qemu: Fails to set up test environment when run with python3.7

2018-12-14 Thread Matthias Klose
On 14.12.18 12:48, Simon McVittie wrote: > Control: forwarded -1 > https://salsa.debian.org/ci-team/autopkgtest/merge_requests/42 > Control: tags -1 + patch > > On Fri, 14 Dec 2018 at 11:31:02 +, Simon McVittie wrote: >> tl;dr: autopkgtest-virt-qemu doesn't work with python3.7. > > This

Re: Python 3.7 or 3.6 in Buster

2018-11-21 Thread Matthias Klose
On 05.11.18 10:32, Matthias Klose wrote: > On 05.11.18 09:17, Michael Hudson-Doyle wrote: >> On Mon, 5 Nov 2018 at 21:09, Thomas Goirand wrote: >> >>> Hi there! >>> >>> During Debconf, we decided we would not decide yet, and see in November >>&

Re: [SUSPECTED SPAM] Re: Python 3.7 or 3.6 in Buster

2018-11-06 Thread Matthias Klose
On 05.11.18 20:31, Jerome Kieffer wrote: > On Mon, 05 Nov 2018 12:26:41 -0500 > Scott Kitterman wrote: > >> I only found out about it due to an upstream bug report on OS X. No one in >> Debian (or Ubuntu) reported it. > > I got one also in fabio: > https://github.com/silx-kit/fabio/pull/243 >

Re: Python 3.7 or 3.6 in Buster

2018-11-05 Thread Matthias Klose
On 05.11.18 09:17, Michael Hudson-Doyle wrote: > On Mon, 5 Nov 2018 at 21:09, Thomas Goirand wrote: > >> Hi there! >> >> During Debconf, we decided we would not decide yet, and see in November >> if we think it's reasonable to allow Python 3.7 to reach Buster. Time >> has passed, RC bugs have

Re: Updated PEP 394 (python and python2 commands)

2018-09-25 Thread Matthias Klose
sorry, I never replied to that email. On 10.06.2018 13:59, Piotr Ożarowski wrote: > [Matthias Klose, 2018-06-08] >> from my point of view this doesn't address: >> >> - being able to de-install the python command for buster, if >>people don't use it. Most dependen

Re: Policy missing from the python* packages?

2018-09-14 Thread Matthias Klose
On 14.09.2018 05:30, Joseph Herlant wrote: > Hi guys, > > It's probably a mistake on my side but I'm looking for the package > that provides the python policy locally. > > In https://packages.debian.org/testing/amd64/python/filelist I can see > that the python package provides the files in the >

Re: Safest way to set python3 as default for `python`

2018-07-16 Thread Matthias Klose
On 16.07.2018 09:44, Bastian Venthur wrote: Hi, sorry if this question has been asked before. What is the currently recommended way to make `python` point to `python3`? I'd like to have it set on a system default level if possible. There is none. Maybe in the far future when Debian doesn't

Python 3.7 in testing/experimental

2018-06-08 Thread Matthias Klose
The Python 3.7 beta 5 packages are now in testing, and experimental has python3-defaults packages which add 3.7 as a supported version. The release candidate is expected next week, only adding Unicode 11 support, and the final release is expected at the end of June. I would appreciate it, if

Re: Updated PEP 394 (python and python2 commands)

2018-06-08 Thread Matthias Klose
On 19.05.2018 07:24, Stuart Prescott wrote: Matthias Klose wrote: The distro should get out of the way of using the python symlink, and giving users the freedom / choice what to do about the link. I think I understand your rationale to stop shipping /usr/bin/python and once the unversioned

Re: Broken dbgsym packages for Python 3

2018-06-04 Thread Matthias Klose
On 04.06.2018 06:34, Scott Kitterman wrote: On Sunday, June 03, 2018 09:26:58 PM Scott Talbert wrote: Hi, I've got a package (wxpython4.0) that builds modules for both Python 2.7 and Python 3. When I rebuilt the package in early May, I started getting the lintian warning

Re: Updated PEP 394 (python and python2 commands)

2018-05-18 Thread Matthias Klose
On 18.05.2018 19:24, Piotr Ożarowski wrote: >> A bit disappointed about this style of communication, Matthias > > same here (you want us to do something without explaining reasons) > EOT for me. well, I thought I explained in the first message. The distro should get out of the way of using the

Re: Updated PEP 394 (python and python2 commands)

2018-05-18 Thread Matthias Klose
On 18.05.2018 18:14, Scott Kitterman wrote: > On Friday, May 18, 2018 11:31:37 AM Matthias Klose wrote: >> On 18.05.2018 05:19, Piotr Ożarowski wrote: >>> [Matthias Klose, 2018-05-17] >>> >>>> PEP 394 [1] saw an update in April 2018 [2], the diffs at [3]. &

Re: Updated PEP 394 (python and python2 commands)

2018-05-18 Thread Matthias Klose
On 18.05.2018 19:02, Piotr Ożarowski wrote: >> who said, that we should rename packages? The only packages being dropped are >> the python defaults packages. >>> >>> I refuse to do that work! >> >> There is no work in renaming the packages. It's about the dependency >> generation >> and the

Re: Updated PEP 394 (python and python2 commands)

2018-05-18 Thread Matthias Klose
On 18.05.2018 05:19, Piotr Ożarowski wrote: > [Matthias Klose, 2018-05-17] >> PEP 394 [1] saw an update in April 2018 [2], the diffs at [3]. >> >> The most important change from my point of view is >> >> -* It is suggested that even distribution-specific pa

Updated PEP 394 (python and python2 commands)

2018-05-17 Thread Matthias Klose
PEP 394 [1] saw an update in April 2018 [2], the diffs at [3]. The most important change from my point of view is -* It is suggested that even distribution-specific packages follow the - ``python2``/``python3`` convention, even in code that is not intended to +* It is strongly encouraged that

Re: Removal of easy_install

2018-05-09 Thread Matthias Klose
S because of > it.  :( > > python-setuptools (39.0.1-2) unstable; urgency=medium > >   * Make the PKG-INFO output reproducible (Chris Lamb). Closes: #894215. >   * Stop shipping the easy_install scripts. > >  -- Matthias Klose <d...@debian.org>  Mon, 02 Apr 2018 11:46:01 +0200

Re: Profile-guided optimisation / link-time optimisation in Buster

2018-04-23 Thread Matthias Klose
On 22.04.2018 21:31, Matthew Woodcraft wrote: > I noticed that profile-guided optimisation and link-time optimisation > have both been unconditionally disabled in Buster's Python 3.6 and 3.7 > packages, though 3.5 in Stretch had them both enabled (on common > platforms). > > Can anyone tell me

Re: packages that use dh_python{2,3} but don't depend on dh-python

2018-03-27 Thread Matthias Klose
On 27.03.2018 18:39, Piotr Ożarowski wrote: > [Matthias Klose, 2018-03-27] >> On 26.03.2018 19:32, Piotr Ożarowski wrote: >>> Hi, >>> >>> Here's a list of packages that will FTBFS soon if dh-python will not be >>> added to Build-Depends (it's time

Re: packages that use dh_python{2,3} but don't depend on dh-python

2018-03-27 Thread Matthias Klose
On 26.03.2018 19:32, Piotr Ożarowski wrote: > Hi, > > Here's a list of packages that will FTBFS soon if dh-python will not be > added to Build-Depends (it's time to drop dh-python from python3's > Depends and old version of dh_python2 from python package). > >

Re: Move to salsa? Merge modules and apps team?

2018-02-07 Thread Matthias Klose
On 07.02.2018 10:12, Ghislain Vaillant wrote: > 2018-02-07 8:58 GMT+00:00 Matthias Klose <d...@debian.org>: >> On 07.02.2018 08:37, W. Martin Borgert wrote: >>> Hi, >>> >>> how about moving the Python team(s) to salsa? >>> And how about merging

Re: Move to salsa? Merge modules and apps team?

2018-02-07 Thread Matthias Klose
On 07.02.2018 08:37, W. Martin Borgert wrote: > Hi, > > how about moving the Python team(s) to salsa? > And how about merging the modules and apps teams into one? > > Moving git packages (modules team) is very easy using > import.sh from https://salsa.debian.org/mehdi/salsa-scripts.git > >

Re: Python 2 removal strategy

2018-01-10 Thread Matthias Klose
On 10.01.2018 17:06, Ole Streicher wrote: > Hi, > > I am the maintainer of the "python-astropy" package, that currently > creates packages for both Python 2 and Python 3. Both packages have a > number of reverse dependencies. > > Recently, upstream announced a new version 3.0 of astropy, which >

Re: /usr/bin/python2 in shebangs?

2017-12-14 Thread Matthias Klose
On 14.12.2017 14:38, Piotr Ożarowski wrote: > Hi, > > I plan to prepare new dh-python upload soon and hence a question about > a bit controversial change: should dh_python2 (as we discussed during > last DebConf's Python BoF) replace /usr/bin/python shebangs with > /usr/bin/python2? +1

Python2 EOL and moving towards Python3

2017-12-13 Thread Matthias Klose
With the Python2 EOL finalized (https://pythonclock.org/) for 2020 it's again time to ping/pester about getting packages ready for Python3. The Python2 EOL doesn't mean that Python2 will go away from the archive any time soon, however even third party projects already have announced an EOL for

Re: Python3.6 plans​ for Buster

2017-10-22 Thread Matthias Klose
On 29.06.2017 05:19, Scott Kitterman wrote: > On Friday, June 23, 2017 02:09:34 PM Scott Kitterman wrote: >> On Saturday, June 17, 2017 04:20:27 AM Scott Kitterman wrote: >>> Python3.6 is already in Unstable and I expect to see it in Testing soon >>> after Stretch is released. >>> >>> I've just

Re: Python 3 Statsmodels & Pandas

2017-09-18 Thread Matthias Klose
On 18.09.2017 19:24, Gordon Ball wrote: > On 18/09/17 09:48, Stuart Prescott wrote: >> Hi Diane, >> >> On Sunday, 17 September 2017 22:14:18 AEST Diane Trout wrote: >>> I just did it that way because it was the least disruptive change I >>> could make that would let me build and test the package.

Re: Python 3 Statsmodels & Pandas

2017-09-17 Thread Matthias Klose
On 16.09.2017 22:59, Yuri D'Elia wrote: > On Sat, Sep 16 2017, Diane Trout wrote: >> python3-pandas: Pandas is not installable >> https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=875723 > > I would have expected the rebuild of python packages affected by the > fpectl extension with a transition,

Re: Bug#729956: Forwarded upstream

2017-09-06 Thread Matthias Klose
On 06.09.2017 23:45, Diane Trout wrote: > I was trying to build it right now but I'm getting a dependency error. > > libpython2.7-stdlib : Breaks: python-pandas-lib (<= 0.20.3-1) but > 0.20.3-1 is to be installed this is unrelated, and waiting for #874413.

pythonX.Y packages stopped building the _fpectl extension

2017-08-31 Thread Matthias Klose
The pythonX.Y packages stopped building the _fpectl extension. Upstream stopped building this extension a long time ago, however I failed to disable it after a last release ... It's now disabled, and causing some build failures because third party extensions still reference it. The most

Re: MBF for deprecating Python2 usage

2017-08-04 Thread Matthias Klose
On 03.08.2017 21:08, ba...@debian.org wrote: > On Aug 3, 2017, at 17:57, Matthias Klose <d...@debian.org> wrote: >> >> While at DebCamp, Stefano Rivera and I sat down to analyze what needs to be >> done >> to deprecate Python2 usage within the distributi

MBF for deprecating Python2 usage

2017-08-03 Thread Matthias Klose
While at DebCamp, Stefano Rivera and I sat down to analyze what needs to be done to deprecate Python2 usage within the distribution. It might not be possible to drop Python2 for the next release, but there are still too many issues with packages. For now we identified some categories which need

Re: Bug#866668: src:python-cryptography: Misbuild with more than one supported python3 version

2017-07-01 Thread Matthias Klose
On 30.06.2017 22:00, Tristan Seligmann wrote: > Control: severity -1 important > > On Fri, 30 Jun 2017 at 19:33 Scott Kitterman wrote: > >> Technically, it builds, but in a way that's not useful. It would actually >> be >> better if it had failed (I noticed this from

Re: Ad-hoc Debian Python BoF at PyCon US 2017

2017-06-20 Thread Matthias Klose
On 10.06.2017 05:32, Barry Warsaw wrote: > On Jun 06, 2017, at 10:57 AM, Sandro Tosi wrote: > >> if we plan (and it looks like we do) to support and distribute 2.7 >> with buster, why not support it *properly*? what's the point of >> deprecating python2.7? either we ship it or not, but if we do

Re: Bug#850789: Patch upload not showing up in deferred queue

2017-01-10 Thread Matthias Klose
On 11.01.2017 00:37, Taylor Kline wrote: > I uploaded a patch for Python3 about ~15 hours ago, but it's not > showing up on https://ftp-master.debian.org/deferred.html > > Attempting to upload again does indicate that it should have > successfully uploaded: >

pypi source packages: changes regarding PEP-0527

2017-01-08 Thread Matthias Klose
Hi, PEP 527 [1] asks for exactly one source "tarball" for uploads to pypi, so you may expect that tarballs are dropped and just zip files are uploaded to pypi. So please be aware to look for both zip files and tarballs in watch files and anything else. I became aware of this for the setuptools

Re: Python 2 in the default installation -- progress made!

2016-12-29 Thread Matthias Klose
On 30.12.2016 05:41, Stuart Prescott wrote: > > Hi everyone, > > one of the objectives for stretch was to reduce the number of Python 2 > packages that are installed in common scenarios, instead having the Python 3 > stack take over. The "standard task" within tasksel is a reasonable place to

Re: Issue on setup.py with imports

2016-09-06 Thread Matthias Klose
On 06.09.2016 09:36, IOhannes m zmölnig (Debian/GNU) wrote: > > > On 2016-09-03 10:18, Marcos wrote: >> I'm migrating Gufw [1] from python2 to python3 and honestly I'm stuck >> with an error from the setup.py: Python module controller not found: >> >> costales@dev:~/Desktop/16.10$ sudo python3

Python 3.6

2016-05-25 Thread Matthias Klose
Python 3.6.0 alpha 1 is now available in experimental. The upstream release date is scheduled for December 2016, about two months before the stretch freeze. The question is, if 3.6 should be targeted for stretch, as a default, or non-default version. That would of course require some

Re: python debug packages

2016-05-17 Thread Matthias Klose
On 14.05.2016 23:26, Iustin Pop wrote: On 2016-04-22 19:36:12, Matthias Klose wrote: On 22.04.2016 16:58, Jean-Michel Vourgère wrote: Hi Now that debug symbols are automatically generated in -dbgsym packages, how do you handle the debug /usr/lib/python2.7/dist-packages/.x86_64-linux

Re: python debug packages

2016-04-22 Thread Matthias Klose
On 22.04.2016 16:58, Jean-Michel Vourgère wrote: Hi Now that debug symbols are automatically generated in -dbgsym packages, how do you handle the debug /usr/lib/python2.7/dist-packages/.x86_64-linux-gnu_d.so files? They used to go in a generic -dbg package. I'm thinking about rrdtool,

Re: Test suite in github but missing from pypi tarballs

2016-04-21 Thread Matthias Klose
On 21.04.2016 16:52, Thomas Goirand wrote: On 04/21/2016 04:10 PM, Edward Betts wrote: Recently I've come across some Python libraries that have a test suite in their github repo but don't include it in the tarball they upload to pypi. Debian binary packages don't normally include the test

Use Python3 where possible

2016-03-15 Thread Matthias Klose
The recent update of pep8 to use Python3 by default, and the regressions mentioned in #807409 reminded me, that we probably should address the use of Python3 more pro-actively. The pep8 binary package included the Python2 modules, plus the scripts, the python3-pep8 package only included the

Bug#815720: transition: python3.5-only

2016-02-23 Thread Matthias Klose
Package: release.debian.org Severity: normal User: release.debian@packages.debian.org Usertags: transition python3-defaults now no longer depends on python3.4, making python3.5 the only supported python3 version. python3.4 should be removed before stretch is released (mostly by binNMUing,

Re: Switching Default Python3 To Python3.5

2016-01-01 Thread Matthias Klose
On 31.12.2015 10:44, Scott Kitterman wrote: I went through the bad/unknown packages in the python3.5 transition tracker [1] and the remainder seems reasonable for doing the transition. Many of them only build support for the default python3 and so they will be bad until after they are rebuilt

Re: dh-python (pybuild + dh_py*) documentation

2015-10-28 Thread Matthias Klose
On 26.10.2015 12:36, Piotr Ożarowski wrote: there are manpages: pybuild¹, dh_python3² / dh_python2³ / dh_pypy⁴ there's a wiki page⁵ with examples, there's even /usr/share/doc/dh-python/README.PyDist⁶ and a talk⁷ about pybuild during DebConf... but people still tell me dh-python's documentation

  1   2   3   4   >